I dream of the day that I can program while backpacking through the Appalachians. Also, title should be fixed -- "Excerise" -> "Exercise".
Honestly, unpack: What keeps you from this?
Excerise cannot undo effects of prolonged sitting
31–40 of 40 posts
Re: Excerise cannot undo effects of prolonged sitting
#32With all of these studies on the affects of "sitting," I'm curious if there is any distinction made between "passive sitting" and "active sitting." E.g. a yoga ball vs. a chair. If you are sitting in a position that forces you to work muscles, is that only marginally better?
Re: Excerise cannot undo effects of prolonged sitting
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apparently I need to be logged in to see the "action shots" of the standing desk because it's flagged as "adult content"?
I can see the pictures on the webpage. But if I click on them ,I get a adult content page in flickr.
I had no idea that "action shots" of standing desks could be consider racy!
Re: Excerise cannot undo effects of prolonged sitting
#34With all of these studies on the affects of "sitting," I'm curious if there is any distinction made between "passive sitting" and "active sitting." E.g. a yoga ball vs. a chair. If you are sitting in a position that forces you to work muscles, is that only marginally better?
The study seems to focus on cardiovascular health and not so much muscular dystrophy and posture. Also, have you seen people sit on yoga balls? Most of them end up leaning on the table for support.
I don't doubt sitting with good posture is helpful, but the main thrust of this study is to tell people to move. Get up every 15-20 minutes to pace, go take that walk around the block, take the stairs, walk home if you can.
Re: Excerise cannot undo effects of prolonged sitting
#35Re: Excerise cannot undo effects of prolonged sitting
#36Eat right, exercise, achieve healthiness, die anyway. We're all food for worms, boys, and any action we take now will certainly be found (in the fullness of time) to be deleterious. It's a matter of balancing what set of regrets we can live with the most. At the end of our run we still have to give our atoms back, and the universe will continue to turn.
Re: Excerise cannot undo effects of prolonged sitting
#37Excerise?
Ex cerise.
Re: Excerise cannot undo effects of prolonged sitting
#38For a developer without the luxury of a standing desk, what alternatives do I have?
Cinderblocks. I went to Home Depot, spent $5, and jacked my desk up 18". I figured I'd take a flier on the standing desk idea, but it's working out so well that I don't think I'll bother with anything fancier. Some kind of an anti-fatigue mat is kind of a must if you're standing on a hard surface. You don't have to go big on that necessarily, either - mine came from the home goods aisle at Wal-Mart.
I mean, I work as a developer at a company - so I can't get them to raise the desk for me or turn up with cinder blocks
Re: Excerise cannot undo effects of prolonged sitting
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cinderblocks. I went to Home Depot, spent $5, and jacked my desk up 18". I figured I'd take a flier on the standing desk idea, but it's working out so well that I don't think I'll bother with anything fancier. Some kind of an anti-fatigue mat is kind of a must if you're standing on a hard surface. You don't have to go big on that necessarily, either - mine came from the home goods aisle at Wal-Mart.
I mean, I work as a developer at a company - so I can't get them to raise the desk for me or turn up with cinder blocks
> or turn up with cinder blocks
Why not?
Re: Excerise cannot undo effects of prolonged sitting
#40Refuting the HN headline with a quote from the article: >Last month in The Lancet, researchers tested whether any amount of exercise could ameliorate the risk of premature death that comes with sitting for eight hours a day. Their epidemiological analysis found that 60 to 75 minutes of concerted daily exercise might to the trick.
Refutes the headline? Only if you failed to RTFA. There are two critical points. Point the first, and IMHO the most important, is the rest of the paragraph that makes the "60 to 75 minutes" statement: the people weren’t necessarily healthy, just alive . In other words, the exercise was sufficient to reduce risks of mortality, but insufficient to actually improve health. That's a damning condemnation of the effects of…
>the people weren’t necessarily healthy, just alive.
Well, yes, when you do a study based on mortality you get a result based on mortality rate. For all we know all the other studies mentioned in the article were also based on mortality. The article was being a bit dishonest by implying that mortality rate is a bad metric without addressing the issue of why that might be so in this case.
The actual point is, as you point out, that sitting is bad. The headline is still wrong and pointlessly so.